tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post8522488198589625787..comments2016-12-09T19:56:05.054-05:00Comments on Rabett Run: Mann vs. National Review and CEI pleadingsEliRabetthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comBlogger72125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-55939299517206116202013-01-25T17:42:05.975-05:002013-01-25T17:42:05.975-05:00Ah, but you&#39;re forgetting, aadams, that Anonym...Ah, but you&#39;re forgetting, aadams, that Anonymous knows things about Mann that you don&#39;t. He doesn&#39;t tell us what these things <i>are</i>, of course, but he <i>knows them</i>. So we can forget all about this &quot;advance of science&quot; nonsense, with such a juicy ad hom dangled just out of reach.Larshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07915440101940467640noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-27888031005396338952013-01-24T06:02:12.435-05:002013-01-24T06:02:12.435-05:00anonymous,
I fully admit to not being qualified t...anonymous,<br /><br />I fully admit to not being qualified to make a judgement on the rights and wrongs of Mann&#39;s paper about volcanoes and tree rings. Furthermore, given the credentials of the 23 scientists who are objecting to Mann&#39;s claims I think it entirely possible that they will be proved right on this question and Mann proved wrong, although I see no particular reason to believe that an anonymous blog commenter agreeing with them lends any extra weight to their arguments.<br /><br />But the point is that whoever is right it will be determined through the normal scientific process, via the published literature - the best argument will win out and hopefully our understanding of the issue will be enhanced in the process. That&#39;s what &quot;matters&quot;.<br /><br />And let&#39;s say Mann is proved wrong. Does that mean his paper was published in bad faith, that his intentions were dishonest, that he was only interested in pushing an agenda? Of course not, there is no reason to believe that he does not honestly believe his paper is valid. But that&#39;s what those against whom he is taking legal action are accusing him of WRT his earlier work - don&#39;t you think there&#39;s a difference between that and just saying &quot;Mann is wrong on this issue&quot;? And that&#39;s why the ability of people here to understand the detailed technical issues relating to his recent paper (although I&#39;m sure some of them do) is not really the point. <br />andrew adamshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17196332706764660436noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-67643224750447134482013-01-23T20:28:41.099-05:002013-01-23T20:28:41.099-05:00Steve Bloom - especially since they seem to like A...Steve Bloom - especially since they seem to like AMO as an explanation for everything!Rattus Norvegicushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03449457204330125792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-60822160197654055532013-01-23T17:55:04.108-05:002013-01-23T17:55:04.108-05:00Just to note, the stance of denialists toward Mann...Just to note, the stance of denialists toward Mann has rather a lot in common with &quot;we have always been at war with Eastasia.&quot;Steve Bloomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12943109973917998380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-23125782125989298742013-01-23T17:52:37.662-05:002013-01-23T17:52:37.662-05:00Sorry, frolicsome anonytroll, you don&#39;t get to...Sorry, frolicsome anonytroll, you don&#39;t get to evade my one question and then insist I address your subsequent ones first. Steve Bloomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12943109973917998380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-35377939653723680812013-01-23T17:02:02.317-05:002013-01-23T17:02:02.317-05:00Anonytroll doesn&#39;t get the rent-seeking concep...Anonytroll doesn&#39;t get the rent-seeking concept. The rent seekers want others to do their work for them, not use public data. As for suspect analyses, anonytroll&#39;s assertion appears to be based on something he read on the internet.<br /><br />Anonytroll also thinks Mann knows nothing of technical matters in tree growth response, a prima facie silly argument, given the fact Mann has worked with tree ring experts for almost two decades.<br /><br />As far as who is more likely to be right, &quot;right&quot; is rather complicated by the fact that there are several issues:<br /><br />I can&#39;t see the Anchukaitis correspondence being their last word after Mann et als reply. Which is why I advocate - wait for it.<br /><br />Rib Smokin&#39; bunnyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-47904785568992667662013-01-23T16:54:55.383-05:002013-01-23T16:54:55.383-05:00Rent-seeking might not be the most precise term.
...Rent-seeking might not be the most precise term.<br /><br />Ecologists might argue that we need a term that expresses a more asymetric relationship.<br /><br />Finance knights might come with terms like reverse takeover.<br /><br />The auditor has some experience with reverse takeover:<br /><br />&gt; One public mineral exploration company with which I was involved underwent a reverse takeover and became an oil exploration company (when I ceased to be an officer and director of the company.)<br /><br />http://climateaudit.org/blog-rules-and-road-map/<br /><br />willardhttp://neveredingaudit.tumblr.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-72278317847477730232013-01-23T16:54:29.124-05:002013-01-23T16:54:29.124-05:00Anonymous - dumb but determined.Anonymous - dumb but determined.Rattus Norvegicushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03449457204330125792noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-53209291638358847902013-01-23T16:14:14.641-05:002013-01-23T16:14:14.641-05:00Data socialists<a href="http://theidiottracker.blogspot.co.uk/2011/12/data-socialists.html" rel="nofollow">Data socialists</a>J Bowersnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-87164572647959584132013-01-23T16:10:16.041-05:002013-01-23T16:10:16.041-05:00Comparative lichurchur enthusiasts might appreciat...Comparative lichurchur enthusiasts might appreciate the similarity between our frolicsome bunny the the epic scam of Don Don on Vaughan&#39;s death thread at Judy&#39;s:<br /><br />http://judithcurry.com/2012/12/04/multidecadal-climate-to-within-a-millikelvin/<br /><br />The avatar of Callicles seems alive and kicking at many places at almost the same time.willardhttp://neverendingaudit.tumblr.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-71143414381515170662013-01-23T16:05:30.885-05:002013-01-23T16:05:30.885-05:00&gt; It&#39;s interesting that the denialist rabbl...&gt; It&#39;s interesting that the denialist rabble never went after e.g. Wally Broecker for having been wrong about a potential THC shutdown [...]<br /><br />Is that supposed to be a quote to back up the claim that Eli noted that Mann&#39;s lawsuit was about Mann&#39;s science?<br /><br />&gt; There are lots of crimes in the world and we can&#39;t solve them all, so why don&#39;t we just give up on attempts at solving any of them?<br /><br />Is our frolicsome bunny really saying that Mann committed a crime, or is it just good ol&#39; calumny?willardhttp://neverendingaudit.tumblr.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-30991272992285847732013-01-23T15:46:57.419-05:002013-01-23T15:46:57.419-05:00Even more interestingly, it appears that the slurs...Even more interestingly, it appears that the slurs against Mann were not, despite the insinuations of anonymous the hater, because he annoyed a powerful cabal of dendrochronologists. No, it was in fact because the people who used insulting language were obsessed by hockey sticks.<br /><br />So basically anonymous the moron is saying that because the hockey stick graph isn&#39;t perfectly correct, although the basic conclusions are still solid, Mann is a fraud and deserves to be insulted from here to next year?<br /><br />Tell us anonymous, where did you learn your ethics or science from?<br /><br />guthriehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17992984293423290387noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-3647911396071441942013-01-23T15:42:03.419-05:002013-01-23T15:42:03.419-05:00I think I understand now.
Because Mann may be wron...I think I understand now.<br />Because Mann may be wrong on his hypothesis about tree rings and volcanic events, it means he&#39;s a fraud, cheat, liar and all the other slurs against him. <br /><br />This is rather an odd thing to do or say. Following on from this precedent we should be insulting prosecutors who fail to convict because they are obviously liars and charlatans. Or maybe students who don&#39;t pass exams should be insulted for failing to get the questions right. guthriehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17992984293423290387noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-13792927913726214012013-01-23T15:36:58.246-05:002013-01-23T15:36:58.246-05:00&quot;It&#39;s interesting that the denialist rabb...&quot;It&#39;s interesting that the denialist rabble never went after e.g. Wally Broecker for having been wrong about a potential THC shutdown, a rather larger issue than the exact degree of climate variability in the late Holocene. There are dozens if not hundreds of similar examples of climate science findings that later on turned out to be significantly wrong.&quot;<br /><br />Well that&#39;s an encouraging red herring!<br /><br />If there are that many mistakes happening over an extended period of time, it&#39;s going to be kind of hard for people to bring them all to light isn&#39;t it?<br /><br />There are lots of crimes in the world and we can&#39;t solve them all, so why don&#39;t we just give up on attempts at solving any of them?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-23264848598213449942013-01-23T15:30:10.210-05:002013-01-23T15:30:10.210-05:00&gt; [Mann&#39;s science] forms a principal basis ...&gt; [Mann&#39;s science] forms a principal basis for the accusations,<br /><br />The first sentence of the complaint shows this to be false.<br /><br />Our frolicsome bunny would owe us an explanation as to why he believes that fraud and rape are related to science, if he played by some fair rules of conversation, something we have no reason to surmise.<br /><br />&gt; as Eli himself noted in his piece<br /><br />If our frolicsome bunny is referring to the one with the title **Mann vs. National Review and CEI pleadings**, this is false. A citation needed here too to have an idea what he has in mind.<br /><br />willardhttp://neverendingaudit.tumblr.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-32749075212639850592013-01-23T15:22:37.909-05:002013-01-23T15:22:37.909-05:00&quot;I can&#39;t get that journal, so I am just g...&quot;I can&#39;t get that journal, so I am just going to wait and see how it develops. So far anony-troll seems to think that its existence is a conclusive rebuttal.&quot;<br /><br />Let me fix that one as well:<br /><br />&quot;So far, anony-troll *knows* that he is going to trust 23 of the world&#39;s leading tree ring experts in technical matters of tree growth response over somebody who apparently doesn&#39;t know even the first thing about it, yet who has a long history of grabbing extensive, publically archived data and slapping various suspect analyses on them anyway.&quot;<br /><br />At the same time, we can listen to Eli complain that it is McIntyre who is a &quot;rent seeker&quot; because he uses other peoples&#39; data in his analyses.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-4389716668719576862013-01-23T15:20:54.745-05:002013-01-23T15:20:54.745-05:00Unconcerned by anyone&#39;s interests but his, our...Unconcerned by anyone&#39;s interests but his, our frolicsome bunny now resorts to tough talk, as if his questioning had any scientific relevance.willardhttp://neverendingaudit.tumblr.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-8694779910295267512013-01-23T15:13:54.052-05:002013-01-23T15:13:54.052-05:00&quot;Also, please note that Eli did not talk abou...&quot;Also, please note that Eli did not talk about Mann&#39;s science, but about Mann&#39;s lawsuit.&quot;<br /><br />The lawsuit document discusses his science Willard. In fact, it forms a principal basis for the accusations, as Eli himself noted in his piece. Nor do I feel the need to adhere to your rules on what can and can&#39;t be said about him, especially when you don&#39;t know anything about the science issues.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-58483909324169646692013-01-23T15:05:31.327-05:002013-01-23T15:05:31.327-05:00&quot;Shall we try ignorant foodtube? Or perhaps t...&quot;Shall we try ignorant foodtube? Or perhaps turd fondler? Imbecile is nice...&quot;<br /><br />There you go Dilb, I knew you had it in you, you just weren&#39;t trying hard enough! God knows it wasn&#39;t from being out of recent practice.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-80091032771068568082013-01-23T15:02:18.918-05:002013-01-23T15:02:18.918-05:00Steve Bloom:
I&#39;m not interested in whether yo...Steve Bloom:<br /><br />I&#39;m not interested in whether you&#39;re &quot;aware&quot; of the issues or not, I&#39;m interested in whether you *understand* them or not. So let me ask you a couple of questions in that regard.<br /><br />1. What studies have addressed Mann&#39;s contention regarding tree rings&#39; abilities to detect volcanically induced cooling events? And who are the authors on them?<br /><br />2. What is the evidence for Mann&#39;s claim that tree rings will be misdated when a missing ring arises? Have dendrochronologists addressed this issue with techniques to account for it, and if so, what is it, and how long ago did they do that? And how many practicing tree ring experts would be unaware of the answers to those questions?<br /><br />3. If it turned out to be true that a general insensitivity to cool temperatures in boreal/subalpine trees were real, what effect might that have on relative estimates of recent vs paleo temperatures, as estimated by tree rings, and whose career-long postulations on same would be supported the most? Think carefully about this one.<br /><br />4. On what scientific basis would one look for the cause of a supposed observational result by linking together two models, both largely untested (and parameter-choice senstitive, as always), and then valuing the output from it above that obtained by exploring simpler and less uncertain explanations on which many people--but not you yourself--are experts?<br /><br />Floor&#39;s yours, tear it up.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-88053551114378674102013-01-23T15:01:49.016-05:002013-01-23T15:01:49.016-05:00Anonyclownshoe,
Shall we try ignorant foodtube? ...Anonyclownshoe, <br />Shall we try ignorant foodtube? Or perhaps turd fondler? Imbecile is nice--good, solid, old-world ring to it, and it translates into Romance languages well. <br /><br />I&#39;m perfectly comfortable having some areas outside my realm of expertise. Were I not, I would not have developed an expertise of my own. The debate over dendrochronology is interesting at some level. I enjoy listening to what the experts say. And it is distinctly possible that Mann has overreached. Again, that is not a mortal sin in science. Bitterness and allowing quarrels to get personal are. They are the reason why you accomplish nothing...why your entire life is wasted.a_ray_in_dilbert_spacenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-49580897907409873152013-01-23T14:42:16.175-05:002013-01-23T14:42:16.175-05:00You need to come up with some new putdowns Dilbert...You need to come up with some new putdowns Dilbert, variety is the spice of life, and besides you need to be able to keep up with the others here, including your ringleader.<br /><br />&quot;That is why Mike Mann has been successful and you an utter failure.&quot;<br /><br />Oh yeah, he&#39;s been successful allright, just not in the way you think, as is evident from the worship-full comments here. You don&#39;t know him OK? So, have whatever opinion your psyche is capable of holding, it&#39;s irrelevant to the reality of the situation, and serves as nothing but an indicator of how people in this debate are fooled by his tactics. Oh yeah, he&#39;s smart, smart in the ways of gaming the system to fool people.<br /><br />&quot;I&#39;ll sit back and watch, as I am not an elephant in that venue.&quot;<br /><br />Let me fix that for you Dilb:<br /><br />&quot;I&#39;ll sit back and watch, as I don&#39;t have the ability, nor the initiative, to understand the actual issues invovled.&quot;Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-1287565278286573142013-01-23T13:01:03.411-05:002013-01-23T13:01:03.411-05:00Anon:
Let me get this straight.
Mann and buddies...Anon:<br /><br />Let me get this straight.<br /><br />Mann and buddies were sitting around drinking beer and eating nachos and found a problem to be examined. After further reflection and another 6 pack, they proposed a possible solution and put it out for scrutiny.<br /><br />Another bunch os scientists , who needed a full case of beer said we don&#39;t think you are right but we don&#39;t have a better answer.<br /><br />From this example of science working as desired, you conclude that a 14 year old paper using different criteria and examining a different subject was fraudulant. <br /><br />Is this your reasoning?rumleyfipshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03346146988416679423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-35818289927477850172013-01-23T11:50:14.566-05:002013-01-23T11:50:14.566-05:00Frolicsome bunny,
You say:
&gt; I&#39;m not tarr...Frolicsome bunny,<br /><br />You say:<br /><br />&gt; I&#39;m not tarring and feathering the entire discipline. I&#39;m talking about ONE person here, hombre. And that&#39;s because Eli felt the need to talk about that one person in two different posts. So get your facts and your analogies straight.<br /><br />There is no contradiction between talking about one Mann and tarring and feathering an entire discipline. <br /><br />The need to talk about an entire discipline would contradict the very idea of tarring and feathering.<br /><br />Also, please note that Eli did not talk about Mann&#39;s science, but about Mann&#39;s lawsuit. I&#39;m sure you can find a way to coatrack YesButMike in every past, present, and future posts at Eli&#39;s. This might be a central conjecture to the auditing sciences.<br /><br />***<br /><br />There are two important to notice, folks.<br /><br />The first is that any mention of &quot;Mann&quot; will attract comments like the ones of the frolicsome bunny. What we are witnessing is some kind of intellectual blackmail. Something like: &quot;if you ever dare to mention Mike, I will place auditing brands and produces&quot;.<br /><br />The second is that this serves to poison the well, or, as auditors would say, to make all the comment threads look the same.willardhttp://neverendingaudit.tumblr.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-65273467676169779962013-01-23T10:59:10.445-05:002013-01-23T10:59:10.445-05:00&#39;Tree rings and volcanic cooling&#39; PDF, inc...<a href="http://www.st-andrews.ac.uk/~rjsw/all%20pdfs/Anchukaitisetal2012.pdf" rel="nofollow">&#39;Tree rings and volcanic cooling&#39; PDF, including Mann et al&#39;s response</a>, courtesy of St. Andrew&#39;s.J Bowersnoreply@blogger.com